“Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit, He takes away … If anyone does not abide in Me, he is thrown away as a branch and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire and they are burned” (John 15:2, 6).
Federal Visionists love this passage because they think that Jesus is speaking about “taking away branches” and “burning branches” that were previously “in Me [Christ].” This would support their claim that someone could be “in Christ” covenantally and yet not attain final salvation (whatever that is). However, nothing could be further from the truth.
Some find this passage troublesome to the truly Reformed faith, but a little knowledge of horticulture is helpful in order to avoid the obvious implications of the text. In fact, there are a variety of eisegetical solutions that we, the elect, have resorted to in order to keep our system in tact.
1) When Jesus allegedly speaks of “taking away branches” and “burning branches,” he is simply speaking hypothetically. These are hypothetical warnings. Jesus is just trying to scare the disciples, kind of like parents who never carry out their threats.
2) When Jesus allegedly speaks of “taking away branches” and “burning branches,” he is speaking of branches that are legally but not organically connected to Christ. Creating these extra-biblical labels helps confusticate the plain meaning of the text.
3) When Jesus allegedly speaks of “taking away branches” and “burning branches,” he is not speaking of branches, but Frisbees that were accidentally thrown into the tree. They were never really branches. They simply looked like branches. Except that they were Frisbees.
4) When Jesus allegedly speaks of “taking away branches” and “burning branches,” he is simply speaking about believers losing theirs rewards in the bema seat judgment (1 Corinthians 3:15). The only down-side to this argument is that it puts us in bed with Zane Hodges and other no-lordship salvationists. Truthfully, there is very little difference between us and them.
Showing posts with label NT - John. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NT - John. Show all posts
Monday, December 1, 2008
Saturday, March 22, 2008
John 5:28-29
“Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice and come forth--those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation” (John 5:28-29).
Federal Visionists love this passage because they think that those who have done good will be resurrected to life, and those who have done evil will be resurrected to condemnation. However, this is does not comport with the solas.
How much good does one have to do to qualify for the resurrection to life? How much evil does one have to do to qualify for the resurrection to condemnation? Is one good deed enough to save? Is one bad deed enough to condemn? This quickly becomes a Pelagian game, in which no one is saved and no one is condemned.
Jesus was obviously having a little fun with the disciples, throwing out a blatantly Pelagian statement just to get their attention. Undoubtedly, the disciples had a good laugh when they realized that Jesus was just kidding.
Federal Visionists love this passage because they think that those who have done good will be resurrected to life, and those who have done evil will be resurrected to condemnation. However, this is does not comport with the solas.
How much good does one have to do to qualify for the resurrection to life? How much evil does one have to do to qualify for the resurrection to condemnation? Is one good deed enough to save? Is one bad deed enough to condemn? This quickly becomes a Pelagian game, in which no one is saved and no one is condemned.
Jesus was obviously having a little fun with the disciples, throwing out a blatantly Pelagian statement just to get their attention. Undoubtedly, the disciples had a good laugh when they realized that Jesus was just kidding.
Friday, March 14, 2008
John 17:22
“The glory which You have given Me I have given to them, that they may be one, just as We are one” (John 17:22).
Federal Visionists love this verse because they think that Jesus wants the church to be one. They argue that unity is a doctrine that ought to be pursued, which means we ought to be “catholic” and not divide up into different denominations and sects. Obviously, this is the same tactic that the liberals used in the last century.
The Reformed faith has always insisted that doctrine must come first. Precision in abstract theology is far more important than lesser qualities like charity and peace.
Besides, the unity of the church is not really a doctrine, per se. It certainly pales in comparison with the weightier topics, such as the order of the decrees.
The problem with pursuing the so-called unity of the church on earth is that we are never quite sure who the elect are, so it is impossible for us to love them on earth. Perhaps we can love our brothers in heaven, after we find out who got in and after their theology has been straightened out.
Federal Visionists love this verse because they think that Jesus wants the church to be one. They argue that unity is a doctrine that ought to be pursued, which means we ought to be “catholic” and not divide up into different denominations and sects. Obviously, this is the same tactic that the liberals used in the last century.
The Reformed faith has always insisted that doctrine must come first. Precision in abstract theology is far more important than lesser qualities like charity and peace.
Besides, the unity of the church is not really a doctrine, per se. It certainly pales in comparison with the weightier topics, such as the order of the decrees.
The problem with pursuing the so-called unity of the church on earth is that we are never quite sure who the elect are, so it is impossible for us to love them on earth. Perhaps we can love our brothers in heaven, after we find out who got in and after their theology has been straightened out.
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
John 14:1
“Do not let your heart be troubled; believe in God, believe also in Me” (John 14:1).
Federal Visionists love this verse because they think that we are saved by believing in Jesus, emphasizing that we must believe in the person of Christ, not merely propositions about Christ. Obviously, this puts Federal Visionists in bed with the neo-orthodox and other liberals.
Since the Reformation, the elect have cherished sola fide, the doctrine that we are saved by faith alone. Now, technically, the object of our faith alone is Jesus. However, Jesus is not merely a wax nose that can be shaped by anyone. The content of our faith alone is crucial. What do we believe (alone) about Jesus and God?
The Reformed faith has always insisted that the most fundamental doctrine of theology proper is that God justifies by faith alone. Justification by faith alone is the doctrine by which the church stands or falls. This is the doctrine that saves your soul. This is the doctrine that divides the sheep from the goats.
At the judgment, many will say to Jesus, “Lord, did we not believe in you?” But he will say, “You did not believe in justification by faith alone. Depart from me. I never knew you.”
Federal Visionists accuse us of making sola fide our god, but this is a baseless charge. We can only answer that we align ourselves with the Reformed tradition, trusting wholeheartedly in sola fide. Here we stand. We can do no other. So help us, sola fide.
Federal Visionists love this verse because they think that we are saved by believing in Jesus, emphasizing that we must believe in the person of Christ, not merely propositions about Christ. Obviously, this puts Federal Visionists in bed with the neo-orthodox and other liberals.
Since the Reformation, the elect have cherished sola fide, the doctrine that we are saved by faith alone. Now, technically, the object of our faith alone is Jesus. However, Jesus is not merely a wax nose that can be shaped by anyone. The content of our faith alone is crucial. What do we believe (alone) about Jesus and God?
The Reformed faith has always insisted that the most fundamental doctrine of theology proper is that God justifies by faith alone. Justification by faith alone is the doctrine by which the church stands or falls. This is the doctrine that saves your soul. This is the doctrine that divides the sheep from the goats.
At the judgment, many will say to Jesus, “Lord, did we not believe in you?” But he will say, “You did not believe in justification by faith alone. Depart from me. I never knew you.”
Federal Visionists accuse us of making sola fide our god, but this is a baseless charge. We can only answer that we align ourselves with the Reformed tradition, trusting wholeheartedly in sola fide. Here we stand. We can do no other. So help us, sola fide.
Sunday, January 20, 2008
John 15:6
"If anyone does not abide in Me, he is thrown away as a branch and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire and they are burned" (John 15:6).
Federal Visionists love this verse because they think that this refers to “covenant breakers.” However, this is thinly-disguised Arminianism.
The Reformed faith has always insisted that the Covenant of Grace is unbreakable because “it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy” (Romans 9:16).
Some have argued that “fire” and being “burned” refer to hell. Those who do not abide in Christ are those who never were “in Christ.” They never did abide in Christ. They might have looked like it, but they were never united to Christ, and thus could never abide in him.
While this interpretation has some support in Reformed churches, we prefer the view put forth by the renowned scholar Charles Ryrie. Ryrie has cogently argued that “fire” and being “burned” refer to the judgment of those who built their lives on wood, hay, and straw. Yet, notice that “if any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire” (1 Corinthians 3:15).
Ryrie deftly defends the gospel from conditions such as “abiding in Christ.” This is simply works-righteousness packaged as the gospel, which is a different gospel, which is no gospel at all. Praise God for men like Charles Ryrie, who help protect the solas.
Federal Visionists love this verse because they think that this refers to “covenant breakers.” However, this is thinly-disguised Arminianism.
The Reformed faith has always insisted that the Covenant of Grace is unbreakable because “it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy” (Romans 9:16).
Some have argued that “fire” and being “burned” refer to hell. Those who do not abide in Christ are those who never were “in Christ.” They never did abide in Christ. They might have looked like it, but they were never united to Christ, and thus could never abide in him.
While this interpretation has some support in Reformed churches, we prefer the view put forth by the renowned scholar Charles Ryrie. Ryrie has cogently argued that “fire” and being “burned” refer to the judgment of those who built their lives on wood, hay, and straw. Yet, notice that “if any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire” (1 Corinthians 3:15).
Ryrie deftly defends the gospel from conditions such as “abiding in Christ.” This is simply works-righteousness packaged as the gospel, which is a different gospel, which is no gospel at all. Praise God for men like Charles Ryrie, who help protect the solas.
Thursday, January 17, 2008
John 15:2
"Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit, He takes away” (John 15:2).
Federal Visionists love passages like this because Jesus says that someone can be in Christ, but if he does not bear fruit, he will be taken away. Federal Visionists argue that this is referring to non-elect covenant members (NECMs) who are “in Me” yet “taken away.” Obviously, this violates nearly every sola.
First, there is no such thing as an NECM. Neither the Westminster Standards nor the Three Forms of Unity allow for this. The Reformed faith has unequivocally taught that the Covenant of Grace is only made with the elect and is, therefore, unbreakable: “They will all know me” (Jeremiah 31:34). Election goes hand-in-hand with covenant membership.
Second, we are saved by grace alone (sola gratia) through faith alone (sola fide). Election is unconditional, and so our salvation cannot depend upon whether we bear fruit or not. Obedience is optional.
So, what does Jesus mean by “he takes away.” Since the elect cannot lose their salvation, this must be a hypothetical warning. Jesus is just trying to scare the disciples, kind of like parents who never carry out their threats.
Federal Visionists love passages like this because Jesus says that someone can be in Christ, but if he does not bear fruit, he will be taken away. Federal Visionists argue that this is referring to non-elect covenant members (NECMs) who are “in Me” yet “taken away.” Obviously, this violates nearly every sola.
First, there is no such thing as an NECM. Neither the Westminster Standards nor the Three Forms of Unity allow for this. The Reformed faith has unequivocally taught that the Covenant of Grace is only made with the elect and is, therefore, unbreakable: “They will all know me” (Jeremiah 31:34). Election goes hand-in-hand with covenant membership.
Second, we are saved by grace alone (sola gratia) through faith alone (sola fide). Election is unconditional, and so our salvation cannot depend upon whether we bear fruit or not. Obedience is optional.
So, what does Jesus mean by “he takes away.” Since the elect cannot lose their salvation, this must be a hypothetical warning. Jesus is just trying to scare the disciples, kind of like parents who never carry out their threats.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)